CVT or Manual

[Vivo]

I've been frequently asked this: If CVTs are more fuel efficient than manual, why is it that the scooter (cvt) consumes more fuel compared to underbones (cubs)/ small bikes with manual trans.

All things being equal, so called experts and all other technical media say that an engine with cvt is
more fuel efficient that of a manual trannied engine.  However, being a rider of both manual and CVT, experience tells me that the manual is more fuel efficient. Why is this? Because in real life, we cannot compare cvt versus manual but compare scooters and underbones (cubs) or small bikes. Scooters are heavier than underbones of the same engine displacement and scooters have smaller and wider wheels. Underbones have 17" wheels. Also in an underbone, the rider has a choice to shift to a higher gear earlier. One can accelerate slowly in the manual but with a cvt, higher reving is needed to launch the bike. And of course figures don't lie, 150 MPG with my old underbone is even not good. Brand new units get 200 or more MPGs with engines of 115 to 125cc.

[ts1]

(Scooter) CVT is much less efficent!
- additional friction of the belt
- always a compromise transmission length, can't drive with low revs (and higher load)

[streido]

I would agree with Ts1 and say a cvt is LESS efficient than a geared bike/scoot for the reasons he stated.

Direct drive is always going to be more efficient than a cvt belt system. Plus you can coast in neutral on a geared bike for downhills etc.

[axy]

CVTs have almost TWICE the transmission loss compared to regular gearbox.
Regular are between 12-15 %, CVTs 20-25 %.

[hippiebrian]

The difference in mileage, at least at the 150 cc size, is negligable.  I think my new People 150 so far gets about the same mileage as my old Bajaj Chetak.  For my money, the cvt is simpler and that just adds to the fun!  For me, simple transportation is always better.  I've owned everything from this scooter (my first cvt) to sport bikes, adventure bikes and, in my younger and dumber days, harleys.  Having ridden my People 150 for a while, I don't think I'll ever ride another bike I have to shift!  Twist and go is so much easier and takes less thought, espescially in twisties.  The loss of a couple mpg's (espescially when you're talking 80+mpg) is not an issue.  The issue is do you, personally, prefer to shift or not to shift.

[Vivo]

The difference in mileage, at least at the 150 cc size, is negligable.  I think my new People 150 so far gets about the same mileage as my old Bajaj Chetak.  For my money, the cvt is simpler and that just adds to the fun!  For me, simple transportation is always better.  I've owned everything from this scooter (my first cvt) to sport bikes, adventure bikes and, in my younger and dumber days, harleys.  Having ridden my People 150 for a while, I don't think I'll ever ride another bike I have to shift!  Twist and go is so much easier and takes less thought, espescially in twisties.  The loss of a couple mpg's (espescially when you're talking 80+mpg) is not an issue.  The issue is do you, personally, prefer to shift or not to shift.

Sometimes, I love the sound of shift... vrOOOOOM....shift.. vrooOOOOOOOOOMMM... shift.... vrooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMM!!!!!!
shift....vroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

my favorite gear before was 2nd gear.... well that was decades ago....

now, it'
s wooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOtt!!!








maybe s computer controlled cvt would have a differnt result....